Museum conservation practices shifted in approaches and goals during the
last century, especially in the last 30 years. Some changes were the result
of a maturing of the field. Others were a consequence of changes in museums
themselves, including growing professionalism among staff; redefinitions
of museums and their roles and responsibilities; and the impact of political,
cultural, and economic pressures on museum management. National and international
museum and conservation organizations, as well as professional training
programs, were influential in this process. Equally important has been the
development of preventive conservation, with a collections-based orientation
supporting the mission and goals of the museum.

Historically, museum conservation centered in the larger institutions and
emphasized restoration techniques and the application of scientific methods
to the examination of objects and the identification of materials. Museum
publications disseminated conservation information, and annual reports discussed
treatment and research, which focused on the fine arts and classical archaeology.
Natural history, ethnographic, and historical collections usually were prepared
by the collector/scientist/curator or assistants, or they were not treated
at all, except with pesticides. Exceptions were items for exhibition, in
which case exhibit staff would clean, restore, and sometimes repaint them.
This traditional approach to the preservation of collections has gradually
changed in many institutions throughout the world; in others, restoration
and exhibition practices remain the same.

Ethnology collections in the Arts and Industries
Building of the Smithsonian Institution, circa the 1890s.
Many early ethnology collections were acquired for research
and usually were not restored or treated, except for the application
of pesticides. Photo: Courtesy of the Smithsonian Institution.

The two decades following the Second World War set the stage for new
developments in conservation in the 1970s. During this time, museums and
their collections grew in number and diversity, as museums redefined their
role as educational institutions. National and international professional
organizations developed conservation codes of ethics, standards of practice,
and museum accreditation programs. By the 1970s, many major art museums
employed conservators, and interns from new conservation training programs
were more common. Museum conservation scientists, although still few in
number, were conducting experiments to improve treatment techniques and
test new synthetic materials. However, conservation was not well integrated
into museum activities, and conservators were generally assigned to a
specific division or a curator, according to their expertise.

The 1970s was a period of reassessment as museums struggled with shifting
priorities, professionalism, fund-raising, and increased visitor access.
The rising value of museum collections and the importance of their conservation
was increasingly noted by national and international preservation advocates,
influencing leaders in the museum community and government funding. Many
institutions centralized conservation functions, and new conservation
laboratories and scientific facilities were developed in larger museums.
Conservation documentation improved because of new professional standards,
and some institutions developed computer databases to integrate conservation
data with other records. Conservation laboratory directors received more
recognition, higher salaries, and seats on museum implementation committees.
However, as students from conservation training programs became interns
and then employees, and their responsibilities broadened, the role of
this new, academically trained staff in the traditional, hierarchical
system was not always clear. Thus, while conservation was included in
museum mission statements and the services of the conservation staff were
considered desirable, conservators were not regularly involved in decision
making. This was especially evident in exhibition development, as conservators
became more concerned with the museum environment and its impact on the
preservation of collections on display.

Exhibition was a driving force in conservation work in many museums, and
as a result, conservation became increasingly important. However, the
new focus on traveling blockbuster shows with hundreds of objects, new
technology, and demanding, fast-paced production schedules was antithetical
to the slow-paced, thorough conservation approaches traditionally employed.
As conservators were forced into a reactive position, conservation controls
tightened, written procedures increased, and conservation staff relationships
with other museum colleagues became strained. Compounding the situation
were educators' mandates to make the exhibitions—and objects—more
accessible to, and interactive with, museum visitors.

During the next decade, some challenges were ameliorated in part by three
factors: training of museum personnel, accountability, and funding. All
led to the development of preventive conservation, a holistic approach
to identifying all factors (including policies, procedures, and lack of
training) that could contribute to the deterioration of collections—and
the development and implementation of systematic, practical approaches
(frequently based on risk assessment) to mitigate them.

In the 1980s, the number of seminars, workshops, and courses in collections
care and management dramatically increased. The role of the collections
manager gradually evolved, especially in natural history and larger historical
museums. Concerns about the ability of museums, especially small ones,
to meet standard requirements were addressed with new government programs
and grants for improving management and conservation. From these initiatives
grew conservation surveys and assessment programs that produced quantitative
information on the needs of collections, as well as a foundation for developing
strategic plans for collections care. Biodiversity issues and new initiatives
in the preservation of natural history collections spurred additional
requests for space, funding, and the development of appropriate and cost-effective
conservation methods for large research collections. The preservation
of related documentation, such as archival records (including field notes
and audiovisual materials) and specimen samples (such as microscope slides),
added new challenges for conservators. Interest in these materials and
the employment of more comprehensive conservation approaches also resulted
in stronger ties between museums and the library and archives communities,
where preservation planning had been practiced for years. Some funding
programs began to coordinate the preservation of museum collections located
in historic buildings with the preservation of the building itself. These
activities led to an increase in systematic conservation planning and
the inclusion of conservators in management planning teams. In addition,
conservators became more involved in public awareness campaigns and outreach
activities, such as "conservation on display" exhibits, public
tours, and the creation of visible storage.

The Anthropology Conservation Lab of the
National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.
By 1980 many larger museums had consolidated their conservation
functions, building new conservation facilities, some with
analytical capabilities. Interns from conservation training
programs assisted with research projects, developing new techniques,
and improving exhibition and storage areas. Photo: Chip Clark.

In the United States, new museum conservation projects resulted in increased
use of regional conservation laboratories and private conservators to conduct
surveys and treat collections. In some instances, regional laboratories
were set up within the museums, delicately balancing the needs of the museum's
own collections with those of outside museums and collectors paying for
services. This challenge became acute later as museum management considered
the fund-raising potential of these laboratories.

In a number of countries, the use of outside contractors, including conservators,
grew more common in museum projects, especially exhibitions. In some institutions,
curators and conservators felt they were losing control of the collections,
and that exhibition and conservation activities should remain integrated
with the other functions of the museum to maintain museum standards and
procedures, such as documentation. In other instances, outside contractors
enabled permanent staff to undertake important activities that otherwise
would not have been possible, and provided expertise in specialized areas.
Whether this approach has led to a decrease in permanent conservation staff
in museums or been the salvation for conservation in times of downsizing
remains under debate.

Discussions began in the 1980s concerning the appropriate preservation of
cultural objects. There was growing interest in the museum's place
in society, cultural diversity, and community participation. In addition
to ethnic-based museums, cultural centers were established; especially noteworthy
were those created by Native American groups. As conservators consulted
cultural representatives in order to explore traditional methods of preservation
and to learn about cultural and religious beliefs and practices, approaches
often were modified to reflect cultural concerns. In addition, new procedures
were developed as some museums housed collections that were regularly used
or cared for by tribal members.

This was also a period of outreach to developing museums throughout the
world, and conservators were frequently included in teams sent to assist
museums and cultural centers in their formation. In addition, new international
preventive conservation programs were established, complementing antecedent,
treatment-based programs in several countries. A goal in these undertakings
was developing indigenous trainers to foster local preservation initiatives.

In the 1990s, preventive conservation gained popularity. Some reasons for
this were related to general museum concerns, such as accountability for
all of the collections, and the adoption of strategic planning and other
management techniques to secure and allocate resources. It also reflected
a better understanding of the positive impact of a holistic approach to
preservation, and the need to involve various staff in achieving conservation
goals. The concepts of shared responsibilities and an integrated approach
to conservation grew out of museum training courses and programs, whose
graduates were more knowledgeable about a wide range of museum activities
and goals and were now assuming decision-making roles. Team management systems
and increased electronic mail communication among staff members fostered
participation.

Light monitoring during installation of
an exhibition at the Museo Histórico Regional de la
Colonia San José in Argentina. This 1999 exhibition
was created as part of a preventive conservation and exhibitions
course for museum professionals from Argentina, Brazil, and
Chile. Important to its success and to the development of
future initiatives was the partnering of foreign instructors
with local counterparts in the program's planning and
implementation. Photo: Carolyn L. Rose.

Attitudes and practices in conservation also changed. Not only were more
cautious, less-intrusive approaches to treatment advocated, but also the
methods and goals for the treatment of artistic and scientific collections
were reevaluated, especially those created with new mediums and technology.
Questions concerning an artist's intent, the function of the museum
that held the object, who owns the object, and who decides how certain cultural
objects should be used or displayed also were being asked. Relationships
to the natural environment, intangible qualities of an object, and repatriation
issues posed additional considerations.

Today, as 30 years ago, we have established patterns that will foster significant
change in the future. Fundamental are changes in the ways museums are managed
and supported. The proportion of government support for museums has decreased
worldwide, earned revenue has become more important, and marketing strategies
are used to attract new audiences. Although museums continue to increase
in number and collections, and visitor numbers have doubled in the last
decade, major museums worldwide have dramatically reduced their staffs,
including conservation positions. As many museums are promoted as social
centers, forums, and agents of change, some suggest that the objects they
hold are not as important as they once were.

This shift to public service affects how conservation strategies must be
developed if they are to compete with the large expense of dynamic public
programming. Conservation managers are required to employ more sophisticated
management techniques and to participate in marketing strategies, donor
cultivation, and difficult decision making concerning collections use. In
some instances, the concepts of cost recovery and the for-profit conservation
laboratory are being explored. Other avenues include public awareness activities
with conservation exhibitions, conservation clinics, and partnerships with
local organizations and the public to "adopt" museum objects to
be preserved.

Electronic media, World Wide Web sites, new technologies, and virtual museums
have engendered other creative conservation approaches. Increased collection
access through digitization is widely practiced, and the electronic restoration
of object images, rather than the objects themselves, is being explored.
Communication through electronic media enables conservators and restorers,
once isolated from current developments, to readily access materials, take
courses, and ask questions on the Internet. Partnerships and international
projects have exponentially increased training opportunities, providing
practical, basic information in a number of languages, assisting museums
in the care of collections. Preventive conservation literature—including
scientific investigations and information on appropriate materials, as well
as collections care techniques—is having substantial impact on the preservation
of collections worldwide. In addition, technological advances provide tools
to develop new approaches and techniques, and enable us to reexamine and
assess object condition and treatment records, as well as environmental
data—information needed to plan for the future.

A 1996 workshop on conservation and collections
management in Samarang, Java. In the last 20 years, collections
care courses for museum staff have increased worldwide. Current
emphasis is on collections—knowing the agents of deterioration;
testing of exhibition and storage materials; conservation
assessments; collection care programs, including emergency
planning; and funding strategies for collection improvements.
Photo: Carolyn L. Rose.

While the last decade has been challenging for museum conservation,
even more challenges lie ahead. What really constitutes a museum today?
Certainly it is not what we thought of at the beginning of the century,
or even 30 years ago. As museums struggle with evolving and often mandated
roles as businesses rather than institutes of higher education or research,
and as entertainment centers rather than collection repositories, many traditional
conservation approaches are outdated. To be effective, conservation strategies
must consider the museum's changing objectives.

In a time when the museum emphasis is on short-term goals, conservation
professionals must make special efforts to redirect focus to long-term museum
preservation responsibilities for the collections held in trust. New conservation
paradigms need to be developed and new skill sets acquired in management,
organization, and planning. We should reassess how conservators operate
in museums and the methods by which conservators, scientists, administrators,
and other museum professionals are trained. Creative funding strategies
must be developed to support conservation staffs to maintain the collections,
carry out treatments, conduct research, and oversee a variety of collection
care activities, providing continuity and upholding standards. It is essential
to develop partnerships with different kinds of organizations to join in
this responsibility, and to leverage precious resources. Fundamental as
well is continuing to share conservation strategies that can be modified
and accepted by other museums, within their own cultural, political, and
economic climate, in order to sustain their capabilities in the 21st century.

Carolyn L. Rose is chairman of the Department of Anthropology at the
National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, and is an adjunct
associate professor at George Washington University. In recent years she
has served as chairman of the board of directors of the National Institute
for Conservation (now Heritage Preservation), chairman of the objects group
of the American Institute for Conservation, and president of the Society
for the Preservation of Natural History Collections.